|
|
On November 04 2012 06:30 paralleluniverse wrote:
Fast and furious isn't Obama's fault, it started under Bush and despite the best efforts of Republicans they've found no evidence of wrongdoing.
Operation Wide-Receiver began and ended under Bush. Fast&Furious is all Barack's. and that is exactly what I mean when I say Obama refuses to take responsibility, it's always about blaming someone else for him.
also: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/29/issa-grassley-report-links-fast-furious-to-widespread-justice-dept-failures/
Obama is, sadly, responsible for the actions of his Justice Dept, and again sadly, has no right to stop Congress from investigating into the issue, which he has done multiple times, up to the point where his Attorney General is currently in contempt of Congress.
|
On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now.
How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol.
|
On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now.
22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/
|
On November 04 2012 06:30 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:18 Defacer wrote:
If Romney loses:
This fucking Republican Bubble has to burst. IT NEEDS TO, if they ever plan on ever winning an election. This perception and mythology that Republicans and conservatives have created around the Obama presidency is fucking ridiculous.
Obama isn't perfect, but he did save the Auto industry, prevent a great depression, add 4.5 million jobs, reform health care, reform student loans, cut 1 trillion in spending, end the war in Iraq, liberate Libya, and killed Osama Bin Laden and most of Al Qaeda's key operatives in four years.
Conservatives insist that Obama is an abomination, or the worst president in US history. Pffft. He isn't even the worst president in the last 8 years. lol, what? Are you serious in this post? He prevented a great depression? He liberated Libya? Talk about mythology, what world are you living in? And just because something occurs while a person is in office does not mean that person did it. What a simplistic way to view things. The partisan bubble is what needs to burst. Guess what everyone: Neither Bush nor Obama destroyed nor saved the US economy. The shock and horror of common sense!
He did liberate Libya. The UN wanted a resolution that would create a no-fly zone, which Obama's advisors supported. Obama insisted on an actual air strike, and a UN resolution that would force Britain and France to provide ground support, knowing that a no-fly zone would be irrelevant -- Gaddafi's forces were primarily jeeps and tanks, and they were bearing down on Benghazi.
It is absolutely no exaggeration, that Obama made the tougher political decision that saved hundreds of thousands of lives, and tipped the balance that allowed the rebels to overthrown Gaddafi. You can read about it here.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/10/michael-lewis-profile-barack-obama
And there is no dispute among economists that without the stimulus your economy would have cratered. If anything, economists argue about whether the stimulus should have been bigger.
So yes, my post serious.
|
On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol.
the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher.
On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/
his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses.
|
On November 04 2012 05:56 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 05:38 coverpunch wrote:On November 04 2012 05:05 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 04:45 coverpunch wrote:On November 04 2012 04:24 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 04:01 johny23 wrote:On November 04 2012 03:50 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 03:39 johny23 wrote:
When the economic stakes are so high for the ENTIRE WORLD, no other issue matters. It's like a company who is on the verge of closing down and filing bankruptcy, yet they have a meeting discussing if workers should get 15 minute or 20 minute breaks.
There's pro's for both.
Pros for Obama: Will let the Fed continue low interest rates, QE, easy money policies and allow us to basically buy our own debt to push the financial disaster down the road( who knows for how long Japan did it for along time).
Pros for Romney: By some huge stroke of luck if he actually tries to change things maybe it will work (I doubt it). But the other Pro to Romney is that the economy would crash a lot faster, allowing us to at least have hope for the future and start to rebuild. The crash will be a lot worst when it comes if we keep doing what we have (as I explained in previous post).
Anyone who thinks we can continue down this path without having a correction knows nothing about economics or cycles of life. There are Ups and Downs in almost everything, that includes the economy. You can't have never ending growth and never ending debt( That's what the American economy has been based on for a long time now). We needed a crash in order to correct this so that we could rebuild. All the policies were doing now are to stop this natural correction, but it EVENTUALLY HAS TO HAPPEN. How can you argue that growth and debt can go on forever without a NATURAL correction?
Are you an Austrian economist? This is a popular Austrian theory, just let the entire economy crash and hit rock bottom, and somehow, inflicting this massive pain will fix everything. It's like Germany's masochistic obsession that economic pain is the solution to the Eurozone 's woes, meanwhile unemployment in Spain and Greece hits 25%. Enough pain yet? But why should we believe any of it is true? What's so wrong with the economy that nothing short of destroying it, so that it can be rebuilt, can fix it? After all, the Great Depression wasn't fixed because people had suffered enough economic pain, it was WW2. There is no reason why we can't have endless growth and endless debt as long as babies are born, technology improves and people work. Maybe endless growth won't be so endless when all the resources on the planet are depleted., but no one expects that to happen anytime soon. Well, I highly doubt anyone here is able to understand the ramifications of everything that has happened and the possible consequences(MYSELF INCLUDED). My opinion is that, the system were on is not sustainable. We had QE, QE2, QE3, Operation Twist and etc. The Fed is now buying MBS's and our bonds. We've done all this and we've barely kept our head above water. I am seriously interested to here how you think this can go on forever without serious ramifications. Not to mention interest rates cannot go lower. Are you saying to quadruple down and do even more stimulus? I haven't even began to touch on the pro debt policies that other countries are starting to and have already enacted. My question to you is what are you proposing? You're saying we can do this forever? The Fed has always maintained that monetary policy is not a panacea and cannot solve the problem alone. So I don't see why you're so shocked to learn that QE1, 2 and 3 hasn't sparked a massive recovery. You're overestimating it's anticipated effects. Not so surprising since the best part about QE is that it keeps disproving the claims that hyperinflation is just around the corner. Any day now. No one is saying that QE will go on forever. The Fed isn't stupid, it wouldn't have done QE if they didn't have an exit strategy, and they do have an exit strategy, they can hold the debt until it mature or sell it off as the economy recovers. Yes, stimulus is the answer. Government should increase spending as households increase savings and pays off debt, because if no one spends, there's no demand. No, borrowing money isn't evil. Interest rates are at historic lows, basically negative real interest rates, because investors and companies have so much idle capital that they are willing to pay the government to take their money. Put it this way: If the market isn't signaling to the government, "shut up and take my money", then why are the yields on government bonds so low? This is quite a series of mischaracterizations. Ben Bernanke has been insistent that quantitative easing was a necessary and vital policy to stave off disaster and kick off growth, and he's been forced to admit subsequently after each round that its effect has been smaller than he thought and MUCH smaller than economic theory has suggested. Which he already knows because he spent the 90s criticizing Japan for doing too many rounds of QE. It doesn't work. The banks aren't asking for liquidity but for some reason the Fed is giving it to them anyways. Stimulus is NOT the answer. Who the hell is the government going to give money to? People who can't afford their standard of living? That's a moral hazard. Companies that lose money? That's stupid and crazy. Companies that make money? Maybe, but companies that make money already get money. People that can afford their standard of living? Possibly, but that's a hard sell to the public (see, tax cuts). Interest rates that are low isn't an indication that the government has a blank check to create massive debt. There are many different reasons why that can happen. If you don't see the folly in that, you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near debt, especially not debt that you want other people to help pay off. If a debt crisis comes, we won't see a long period of warning signs, it will be a sudden massive ballooning of the problem. Your post is a compete mischaracterization of everything. It's not even just about being wrong on the economics, you're completely wrong on what Ben Bernanke has publicly said. You claim the Fed admits that the effect of QE is much smaller than believed. But this is not true. Here's Bernanke's Jackson Hole speech earlier this year where he argues that the Fed's QE program has had a positive and significant impact. How effective are balance sheet policies? After nearly four years of experience with large-scale asset purchases, a substantial body of empirical work on their effects has emerged. Generally, this research finds that the Federal Reserve's large-scale purchases have significantly lowered long-term Treasury yields. For example, studies have found that the $1.7 trillion in purchases of Treasury and agency securities under the first LSAP program reduced the yield on 10-year Treasury securities by between 40 and 110 basis points. The $600 billion in Treasury purchases under the second LSAP program has been credited with lowering 10-year yields by an additional 15 to 45 basis points.12 Three studies considering the cumulative influence of all the Federal Reserve's asset purchases, including those made under the MEP, found total effects between 80 and 120 basis points on the 10-year Treasury yield.13 These effects are economically meaningful. Importantly, the effects of LSAPs do not appear to be confined to longer-term Treasury yields. Notably, LSAPs have been found to be associated with significant declines in the yields on both corporate bonds and MBS.14 The first purchase program, in particular, has been linked to substantial reductions in MBS yields and retail mortgage rates. LSAPs also appear to have boosted stock prices, presumably both by lowering discount rates and by improving the economic outlook; it is probably not a coincidence that the sustained recovery in U.S. equity prices began in March 2009, shortly after the FOMC's decision to greatly expand securities purchases. This effect is potentially important because stock values affect both consumption and investment decisions. While there is substantial evidence that the Federal Reserve's asset purchases have lowered longer-term yields and eased broader financial conditions, obtaining precise estimates of the effects of these operations on the broader economy is inherently difficult, as the counterfactual--how the economy would have performed in the absence of the Federal Reserve's actions--cannot be directly observed. If we are willing to take as a working assumption that the effects of easier financial conditions on the economy are similar to those observed historically, then econometric models can be used to estimate the effects of LSAPs on the economy. Model simulations conducted at the Federal Reserve generally find that the securities purchase programs have provided significant help for the economy. For example, a study using the Board's FRB/US model of the economy found that, as of 2012, the first two rounds of LSAPs may have raised the level of output by almost 3 percent and increased private payroll employment by more than 2 million jobs, relative to what otherwise would have occurred.15 The Bank of England has used LSAPs in a manner similar to that of the Federal Reserve, so it is of interest that researchers have found the financial and macroeconomic effects of the British programs to be qualitatively similar to those in the United States.16 To be sure, these estimates of the macroeconomic effects of LSAPs should be treated with caution. It is likely that the crisis and the recession have attenuated some of the normal transmission channels of monetary policy relative to what is assumed in the models; for example, restrictive mortgage underwriting standards have reduced the effects of lower mortgage rates. Further, the estimated macroeconomic effects depend on uncertain estimates of the persistence of the effects of LSAPs on financial conditions.17 Overall, however, a balanced reading of the evidence supports the conclusion that central bank securities purchases have provided meaningful support to the economic recovery while mitigating deflationary risks. Source: http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/bernanke20120831a.htmIn fact you should read the whole speech. It's very informative. Then you claim that Bernanke was criticizing the Bank of Japan for doing QE. In fact, it was the opposite, he was arguing the BOJ should do QE and even more. Here's Bernanke's paper on the BOJ: http://www.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/bernanke_paralysis.pdfAnd here's Krugman taking some quotes from the paper: In a hard-hitting 2000 paper titled “Japanese Monetary Policy: A Case of Self-Induced Paralysis?” Bernanke declared that “far from being powerless, the Bank of Japan could achieve a great deal if it were willing to abandon its excessive caution and its defensive response to criticism.” He proceeded to lay out a number of actions the Bank of Japan could take. And he called on Japanese policy makers to act like F.D.R. and do whatever it took: “Japan is not in a Great Depression by any means, but its economy has operated below potential for nearly a decade. Nor is it by any means clear that recovery is imminent. Policy options exist that could greatly reduce these losses. Why isn’t more happening? To this outsider, at least, Japanese monetary policy seems paralyzed, with a paralysis that is largely self-induced. Most striking is the apparent unwillingness of the monetary authorities to experiment, to try anything that isn’t absolutely guaranteed to work. Perhaps it’s time for some Rooseveltian resolve in Japan.” Bernanke had some specific proposals that could serve as advice for the Fed today. One set of options would have it take a larger role in financial markets. Short-term interest rates may be zero, unable to go lower, but longer-term rates aren’t. So the Fed, which typically buys only short-term U.S. government debt, could expand its portfolio, buying long-term government debt, bonds backed by home mortgages and so on, in an effort to drive down the interest rates on these assets. This is the strategy that has come to be known, unhelpfully, as quantitative easing. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/magazine/chairman-bernanke-should-listen-to-professor-bernanke.htmlStimulus works by paying people or companies to do things. Like paying them to build a bridge, fix pot holes in the road, give money to the states to rehire the hundreds of thousands of public sector jobs that have been lost, mostly teachers, etc. You've completely mischaracterized how stimulus works. You're statement on interest rates makes no sense. You said there are many reasons why they're low now. Yes, there are. But can you name them? And why shouldn't the government invest now. There will never be a better time. Should the government invest when interest rates are high, rather than when they are low? Your quotes prove nothing. Bernanke's speech shifts the goal posts by saying that QE had a meaningful effect but doesn't compare it to the initial goals or the theoretical effects it was supposed to have. But let's just agree on this quote from Bernanke: Monetary policy cannot do much about long-run growth, all we can try to do is to try to smooth out periods where the economy is depressed because of lack of demand. Because of the financial crisis, the economy has been slow to reach back to its potential and we are trying to provide additional support so that the recovery can bring the economy back to its potential. But in the medium and long term monetary policy cannot do anything to make the economy healthier or growth faster, except to keep inflation low, which are committed to doing. I couldn't find a full transcript from his House testimony in July but that's where I would go. Monetary policy can't solve the problem AT ALL, if we agree the essential problem is an unhealthy economy and slow growth. But you're getting squirrelly on stimulus. The government stimulates the economy by either providing new projects or supporting those in place. Doing that stuff you're saying might be good for society but it doesn't support the economy in and of itself. It goes back to Bernanke's quote - you're suggesting it to smooth out standards of living in tough times but it does nothing to generate growth. You're trying to have it both ways by initially arguing that stimulus is necessary for growth because it will spur demand. The government should not invest in projects designed to create growth until it can expect a return above and beyond the cost of capital. Can it do that right now? Possibly, but the US government does not and should not serve as the world's biggest investment bank. Low interest rates are not an excuse that the government should spend on every project it sees. Low interest rates indicate that it will be easier to find profitable opportunities, but IMO the government should leave that to private individuals. If you think otherwise, we can have that discussion but it's a difference of opinion. So you've lied twice about what Bernanke has said, and the best you've got is that Bernanke once said that monetary policy won't solve everything. That's right, Bernanke has been saying that monetary policy isn't a panacea in congressional testimony, in press conferences, and basically everywhere since the GFC. But I want transcripts and quotes to back up your claim. Where did Bernanke say that QE 1, 2 and 3 have performed below expectations? Where did he say that the BOJ shouldn't have done QE? Transcripts or you have no creditability left. How does putting idle people to work not stimulate the economy. You have unemployed people doing nothing, and not being able to afford much. With stimulus, you can put some people to work, which gives them income, which they spend, and that generates demand for business. How does that do nothing to generate growth? So increasing employment and demand, when there are idle resources, doesn't generate growth? There is plenty of evidence the stimulus works, the CBO says the stimulus created 3 million jobs: http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/c-b-o-s-take-on-the-stimulus/The role of government isn't to ensure short run profits by checking that all it's projects will have positive returns, government also needs to consider the absolute waste of human capital that is created by having high unemployment. It needs to consider the effect of having a generation of young people disenfranchized because they can't find a job, which will have negative long run effects on the economy. Having a prolonged weak economy isn't good, it makes the deficit worse by depressing tax revenues, it wastes people's lives, and the government should stimulate the economy to increase employment and growth. Government isn't a business. You say that low interest rates make it easier for projects to be profitable, which is true, you also say that it should leave that to the private sector. But the private sector aren't the ones who can borrow at very very low interest rates.
So many mischaracterizations that it's hard to choose.
You're dismissive of my point by saying Bernanke says monetary policy isn't a panacea. But it doesn't matter because you don't have a point on whether QE was a good policy or not, just that the Fed must have a way out and that its critics are exaggerating the consequences. So whatever. (although Bernanke softens his tone in 2003, arguing for more cooperation between fiscal and monetary authorities, he doesn't criticize the BOJ for doing QE too many times. I'll correct myself there.)
But like I said, you're too squirrelly on the role of stimulus. Is it to generate growth or to help people ride out a temporary downturn in aggregate demand? Those two things are not the same. Saying the stimulus helped is pure demagoguery. Of course it helped. But you have to consider the cost. Did the economy grow by more than the stimulus plus the eventual costs of interest added to the national debt? You might argue that we have yet to see and that's fine, but that's different from insisting stimulus is the key to future growth.
Having a prolonged weak economy isn't good, I agree with you. But can the government generate real growth on its own? I don't think you've proven that in any way. It's a theoretical possibility and certainly tempting with such low interest rates, but I think it's a really bad idea for the government to try. That's not part of the government's job and they're not suited for it.
|
On November 04 2012 06:45 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:30 paralleluniverse wrote:
Fast and furious isn't Obama's fault, it started under Bush and despite the best efforts of Republicans they've found no evidence of wrongdoing. Operation Wide-Receiver began and ended under Bush. Fast&Furious is all Barack's. and that is exactly what I mean when I say Obama refuses to take responsibility, it's always about blaming someone else for him. also: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/29/issa-grassley-report-links-fast-furious-to-widespread-justice-dept-failures/ Obama is, sadly, responsible for the actions of his Justice Dept, and again sadly, has no right to stop Congress from investigating into the issue, which he has done multiple times, up to the point where his Attorney General is currently in contempt of Congress.
Obama isn't blaming someone else. I am. And when someone else is to blame, like how Bush is to blame for blowing up the deficit, we should have no hesitation to blame who's really at fault.
I don't see Eric Holder and Barack Obama on this list:
The 140-page report singles out five senior agency officials: Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, acting Deputy Attorney General Gary Grindler, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein and Associate Deputy Attorney General Ed Siskel.
It turns out that Fast and Furious did start in 2009 but Operation Wide Receiver started under Bush as you said, but they seem to be virtually the same program under a different name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fast_and_Furious
|
On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher.
No there is no such "conventional wisdom". It's been debunked time and time again for presidential elections.
|
On November 04 2012 06:34 Zaqwert wrote:Show nested quote +
Obama isn't perfect, but he did save the Auto industry, prevent a great depression, add 4.5 million jobs, reform health care, reform student loans, cut 1 trillion in spending, end the war in Iraq, liberate Libya, and killed Osama Bin Laden and most of Al Qaeda's key operatives in four years.
^ I want everyone to read this, seriously. Do you have any idea what the President actually does? HAIL OBAMA AMIRITE?
Do you?
Obama's record isn't perfect. But for four years, it's pretty fucking solid. And apparently, acknowledging his accomplishments is somehow partisan, or sycophantic.
It's people like you that are in the bubble, for some reason. ALL HATE OBAMA, AMIRITE? The amount of obstruction, open contempt, and xenophobia that has been stirred by Obama's presidency is not only palatable, but disturbing.
|
On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/ his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses.
Behind in..... according to..... you?
|
On November 04 2012 06:53 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. No there is no such "conventional wisdom". It's been debunked time and time again for presidential elections.
when has it been "debunked"?
On November 04 2012 06:55 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/ his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses. Behind in..... according to..... you?
according to RCP. Romney is ahead in VA.
|
On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/ his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses.
What state? And that's a list of all polls today, there's no cherry picking.
|
On November 04 2012 06:33 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:30 jdseemoreglass wrote:On November 04 2012 06:18 Defacer wrote:
If Romney loses:
This fucking Republican Bubble has to burst. IT NEEDS TO, if they ever plan on ever winning an election. This perception and mythology that Republicans and conservatives have created around the Obama presidency is fucking ridiculous.
Obama isn't perfect, but he did save the Auto industry, prevent a great depression, add 4.5 million jobs, reform health care, reform student loans, cut 1 trillion in spending, end the war in Iraq, liberate Libya, and killed Osama Bin Laden and most of Al Qaeda's key operatives in four years.
Conservatives insist that Obama is an abomination, or the worst president in US history. Pffft. He isn't even the worst president in the last 8 years. lol, what? Are you serious in this post? He prevented a great depression? He liberated Libya? Talk about mythology, what world are you living in? And just because something occurs while a person is in office does not mean that person did it. What a simplistic way to view things. The partisan bubble is what needs to burst. Guess what everyone: Neither Bush nor Obama destroyed nor saved the US economy. The shock and horror of common sense! apply austerity to the u.s. and watch it burn.
You say that like austerity is the problem or inheritably a bad thing, when in reality the problem is that were already in such a big mess that we have no other choice but to go all in on pro debt policies, because no president wants to see another great depression on his watch.
|
The cost of all the stimulus, in the end, is a devaluating dollar (dollar went from like 1,10euro in 2000 to 0.85 euro now)and high inflation (also asset inflation).
Everything else, like debt and deficit is virtual, the exchange rate and purchase power of the dollar are real.
As long as the dollar does not crash against the yen, euro or yuan, or loose its purchase power inside america, the fed and usa government can and will! continue its policy of stimulus and quantitive easing.
It basicly is a free lunch lol, as long as the dollar does not crash.
|
On November 04 2012 06:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:53 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. No there is no such "conventional wisdom". It's been debunked time and time again for presidential elections. when has it been "debunked"?
It's up to you to bring up consistent cases of the phenomena being true, then for me to show how the correlation does not exist.
|
On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/ his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses.
You predict wins in states where Obama has huge leads. Might as well declare California for red while you're at it.
|
On November 04 2012 06:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:53 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. No there is no such "conventional wisdom". It's been debunked time and time again for presidential elections. when has it been "debunked"? Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:55 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/ his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses. Behind in..... according to..... you? according to RCP. Romney is ahead in VA.
So..... if the RCP says Romney is ahead while 5 other polls show Romney being behind, those other polls must all be wrong, since they are going against the all powerful truth known as RCP am I right?
|
On November 04 2012 06:52 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:45 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:30 paralleluniverse wrote:
Fast and furious isn't Obama's fault, it started under Bush and despite the best efforts of Republicans they've found no evidence of wrongdoing. Operation Wide-Receiver began and ended under Bush. Fast&Furious is all Barack's. and that is exactly what I mean when I say Obama refuses to take responsibility, it's always about blaming someone else for him. also: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/29/issa-grassley-report-links-fast-furious-to-widespread-justice-dept-failures/ Obama is, sadly, responsible for the actions of his Justice Dept, and again sadly, has no right to stop Congress from investigating into the issue, which he has done multiple times, up to the point where his Attorney General is currently in contempt of Congress. Obama isn't blaming someone else. I am. And when someone else is to blame, like how Bush is to blame for blowing up the deficit, we should have no hesitation to blame who's really at fault. I don't see Eric Holder and Barack Obama on this list: Show nested quote +The 140-page report singles out five senior agency officials: Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, acting Deputy Attorney General Gary Grindler, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein and Associate Deputy Attorney General Ed Siskel. It turns out that Fast and Furious did start in 2009 but Operation Wide Receiver started under Bush as you said, but they seem to be virtually the same program under a different name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fast_and_Furious
Obama has blamed Bush for Fast and Furious. the deficit has nothing to do it.
Holder and Obama are in charge of those people, hired those people, and are illegally protecting those people from a Congressional investigation. Op Wide-Receiver began under Bush as a gun-tracking program, and it was found to be a failure and it was shut down without any loss of weapons or life. Fast and Furious was restarted as a gun-walking program and was shut down only after the death of a Border Patrol agent and after the loss of thousands of guns. big difference.
|
Someone mentioned that Bush 'owned' the tragedy of 9/11, but Obama didn't own the four American deaths in Libya.
Thanks for forgetting to mention that Bush's 'response' to 9/11 was to start a nine-year, unbudgeted war in Iraq under false pretenses with bad information and very little international support. Way to 'own'.
Bush makes Obama look like a fucking Sun Tzu.
|
On November 04 2012 06:59 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:53 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. No there is no such "conventional wisdom". It's been debunked time and time again for presidential elections. when has it been "debunked"? On November 04 2012 06:55 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/ his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses. Behind in..... according to..... you? according to RCP. Romney is ahead in VA. So..... if the RCP says Romney is ahead while 5 other polls show Romney being behind, those other polls must all be wrong, since they are going against the all powerful truth known as RCP am I right?
RCP is an aggregate.
On November 04 2012 06:57 mynameisgreat11 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. On November 04 2012 06:45 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. 22 polls out today. Obama wins 19. Romney wins 1. There are 2 ties. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/ his odds say Obama has a 67 percent chance of winning a state he is behind in.... you'll forgive me if I think Nate Silver is a bit biased in which polls he uses. You predict wins in states where Obama has huge leads. Might as well declare California for red while you're at it.
within the MoE is not "huge leads"...
On November 04 2012 06:57 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 06:55 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:53 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:48 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 04 2012 06:45 Feartheguru wrote:On November 04 2012 06:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Romney is ahead in Virgina and Florida. He has NC locked up, and is within 2 points in NH, CO, and Iowa. All three of those are wide open. He is within 3 points in Ohio, which means turnout and the undecided vote will decide, both are heavily favoring Romney right now. He's also within 5 points in: michigan and Penn, and is close to 5 in Wisconsin. he is within 3 points in NV.
all that is RCP data, so it's based in part off the same polls that are vastly oversampling Democrats. looking at the electoral map:
Right now, RCP has it at 201-191 with Obama in the lead. Romney will win FL and NC. 201 - 235 Romney. VA is pretty much a lock, meaning that it's 201-248.
Obama will probably win Penn and Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin. 247-248 with a Romney lead. CO and NH are both likely to fall to Romney: 247-261. NV and Iowa are likely Romney victories, giving him at least a 273 EC victory with the very real possibility of Ohio adding to it, giving him a 291-247 win. personally, I would predict a Romney victory in WI and Penn, giving him the 321-217 sweep.
either way, the election is still wide open for Romney, with the onus on Obama. we'll see how the next 3 days play out, but I think Romney is probably feeling pretty comfortable right now. How can you possibly know who the undecided vote is favoring lol. the undecided vote traditionally breaks away from the incumbent. conventional wisdom holds that they will likely break to Romney by a about 3 to 1 or maybe even higher. No there is no such "conventional wisdom". It's been debunked time and time again for presidential elections. when has it been "debunked"? It's up to you to bring up consistent cases of the phenomena being true, then for me to show how the correlation does not exist.
unless conventional wisdom would suggest that it is so, than the burden usually falls on the challenger of that wisdom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
